Qualitative not Quantitative

[dr_mabeuse]

You know how we're always railing against people describing breasts in terms of cup sizes or giving dick length in inches? Well I think that proscription can be expanded to a general rule for fiction: don't get quantitative when you can be qualitative. In other words: stay away from numbers.

This came to me when I read a story excerpt in which a woman stays still "for about a minute" during sex. A minute seems like a pretty long time for someone to hold still, but I knew what the author was trying to say. He meant that she held still for a relatively long period of time during the lovemaking. Nailing it down to 60 seconds made it seem awkward. It would have been better if the author hadn't timed it.

Even when you're dealing with a character's height, it seems amateurish to say that the man was 6'2" and 180 lbs (the classic for Literotica, it seems) when what we really mean to say was that the guy was big and imposing, lean and muscular.

So that's my new theory: Qualitative, not quantitative.

---dr.M.

 

[damppanties]

This came to me when I read a story excerpt in which a woman stays still "for about a minute" during sex. A minute seems like a pretty long time for someone to hold still, but I knew what the author was trying to say. He meant that she held still for a relatively long period of time during the lovemaking. Nailing it down to 60 seconds made it seem awkward. It would have been better if the author hadn't timed it.

---dr.M.

Doc, I did that in a story, I think. I don't know for sure, it just seems horribly familiar. In my defense, when I say one minute, I do not literally mean a minute = sixty seconds. It's more like a brief period of time. A minute can seem incredibly short or too long depending on what you're doing. Therefore, to me, 'about a minute' varies.

IMO, it's better to say "she stayed still for about a minute" rather than "she stayed still for a relatively long period of time". The reader's translation of 'about a minute' into sixty seconds is not exactly what I aim for.

 

[The_old_man]

Minute, moment, interchangeable in most minds when reading a sex scene. I do agree on linear, size, measurements.

 

[Seattle Zack]

"She quivered, struggling to remain motionless, a frozen second that seemed to last forever."

Back to the old adage, show don't tell. Isn't it better to filter the experience through the character rather than blandly state it outright?

 

[Uther_Pendragon]

I think that this is a good rule, except that rules
have exceptions. As for "minute," I use that for "moment"
in casual speech. "Just a minute," "wait a minute."
|
"Stay here," she said. She wanted the comfort of his
weight. A minute later, it was a ton she had to lift with
every breath. "Could you...?" He rolled off.
|
I expect you to take the minute to be precisely 60 seconds
no more than I expect you to take the weight to be exactly
-- even approximately -- 2000 pounds.

 

[English Lady]

I guess the minute thing is all about context. In general conversation

"hang on a minute" obviously doesn't mean wait there for 60 seconds!!!



"She was still for a minute and then...." that suggests to me a brief moment of time where as


"she stays still for about a minute" sounds more like a sixty second timing thing to me.


Maybe it's just me though*L*

 

[Dirt Man]

You know how we're always railing against people describing breasts in terms of cup sizes or giving dick length in inches? Well I think that proscription can be expanded to a general rule for fiction: don't get quantitative when you can be qualitative. In other words: stay away from numbers.

This came to me when I read a story excerpt in which a woman stays still "for about a minute" during sex. A minute seems like a pretty long time for someone to hold still, but I knew what the author was trying to say. He meant that she held still for a relatively long period of time during the lovemaking. Nailing it down to 60 seconds made it seem awkward. It would have been better if the author hadn't timed it.

Even when you're dealing with a character's height, it seems amateurish to say that the man was 6'2" and 180 lbs (the classic for Literotica, it seems) when what we really mean to say was that the guy was big and imposing, lean and muscular.

So that's my new theory: Qualitative, not quantitative.

---dr.M.

The quest for believability, and realism in a fictional story is such that we often forget to bring the reader into the story. If I were to say that; "He was a six foot something granite mountain of male hormones wrapped in a 5'9" loose wrapping," one might get the image of that perpetual horny kid in the movie "Porky's." So using numbers isn't always inan, it just depends on by whom, and how they are used to make the story work.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

By the way, my contest story is split evenly between 4, and 5 votes. Making it a 4.5 average now, but the vote count is still under the required 25 votes to make it to the finish line.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

[BBack to the old adage, show don't tell. Isn't it better to filter the experience through the character rather than blandly state it outright? [/B]

That's exactly right. When a writer resorts to giving bra size, what he's really trying to do is tell us that she had wonderfually large breasts. When we read the old 6'2" 180 lbs, the author's trying to tell us that the character was a real hunk of man. It's much better to turn the quantities into qualities.

The meaning of "minute"--whether a short, indeterminate measure of time or precisely 60 seconds--isn't really the issue. (In the story I mentioned, it actually was "about three minutes") It's really about putting the number into subjective, experiential terms.

And of course there are no hard and fast rules in writing. There are plenty of times when it's perfectly appropriate to use numbers, even in character descriptions. It's just something to be aware of.

---dr.M.

 

[Dirt Man]

That's exactly right. When a writer resorts to giving bra size, what he's really trying to do is tell us that she had wonderfually large breasts. When we read the old 6'2" 180 lbs, the author's trying to tell us that the character was a real hunk of man. It's much better to turn the quantities into qualities.

The meaning of "minute"--whether a short, indeterminate measure of time or precisely 60 seconds--isn't really the issue. (In the story I mentioned, it actually was "about three minutes") It's really about putting the number into subjective, experiential terms.

And of course there are no hard and fast rules in writing. There are plenty of times when it's perfectly appropriate to use numbers, even in character descriptions. It's just something to be aware of.

---dr.M.

Exactly right.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[pop_54]

Yeppers

Sometimes figures and measurements help make a comparison, most times precise sounding figures in a fiction story make it sound false.

Yeppers Seatle & Doc, show not tell, or compare not be precise.

"He was a heavy looking muscular guy all of 6ft 2ins or more", sounds a bit better than "he was 6 ft 2 ins and 180lbs"

"His weapon was damn near 9 inches I'd guess" sounds better than "he had a 9 inch cock"

"She has a fine set of breasts, a pair of 38's if ever I saw any" sounds a bit less clinical than "She has 38DD breasts"

All of the above use the figures as a comparison to show the reader the person concerned without the clinical and cold sound of strict measurements to just describe the person as you would on a police wrap sheet.

The minute thing, well, off the cuff remark or strict measurement depends on the way it's written into the narrative.

 

[Dirty Slut]

Re: Yeppers

Originally posted by pop_54
Sometimes figures and measurements help make a comparison, most times precise sounding figures in a fiction story make it sound false.

Yeppers Seatle & Doc, show not tell, or compare not be precise.

"He was a heavy looking muscular guy all of 6ft 2ins or more", sounds a bit better than "he was 6 ft 2 ins and 180lbs"

"His weapon was damn near 9 inches I'd guess" sounds better than "he had a 9 inch cock"

"She has a fine set of breasts, a pair of 38's if ever I saw any" sounds a bit less clinical than "She has 38DD breasts"

All of the above use the figures as a comparison to show the reader the person concerned without the clinical and cold sound of strict measurements to just describe the person as you would on a police wrap sheet.

The minute thing, well, off the cuff remark or strict measurement depends on the way it's written into the narrative.

Ya really can't win either way. If you expound by saying the guy had a prick a thick as a beer can, and was as long and hard as a slim bottle of wine you get grouching. If you give measurements you get grouching. Why even bother? Just say he had a big dick, and leave it at that. But what's that you say? Not creative enough? How about his dick entered me like a prehensile tail of a bull moose stretching out my aching loins, and like two fists shoved up my cunt it felt like he were trying to rip me into two halves. In fact no matter how you discribe a prick, it's still gonna fuck ya. And unless a guy has ever had it up the ass himself he can't come close to having any idea what it is like for a woman when we are getting fucked by any sized cock.

If I sound vulgar, then understand that I am pissed, and when I am pissed, I sound vulgar as a sailor who has just shit himself in the gutter because he is drunk on cheap booze. To true, many newbies do use numerals to tell and not show, but they eventually learn, or they go and fade away. The first thing to learn about writing properly is to read good books. See how your favorite authors do things, then you do it. It's that simple. Writing erotica/porn isn't really any different, it's just a different genre. If numbers are your thing go into mathmatics. If writing fiction is your passion, then write your passion, and edit, edit, edit.

DS

 

[Sabledrake]

There's nothing like having kids to really drive home that literal thing ...

Me -- Go brush your teeth
Kid -- In a minute!
(ten minutes go by ...)

Kid -- Can you get me some milk?
Me -- Just a second.
Kid -- one-one-thousand. Okay!

Sabledrake

 

[Dirt Man]

Re: Re: Yeppers

Ya really can't win either way. If you expound by saying the guy had a prick a thick as a beer can, and was as long and hard as a slim bottle of wine you get grouching. If you give measurements you get grouching. Why even bother? Just say he had a big dick, and leave it at that. But what's that you say? Not creative enough? How about his dick entered me like a prehensile tail of a bull moose stretching out my aching loins, and like two fists shoved up my cunt it felt like he were trying to rip me into two halves. In fact no matter how you discribe a prick, it's still gonna fuck ya. And unless a guy has ever had it up the ass himself he can't come close to having any idea what it is like for a woman when we are getting fucked by any sized cock.

If I sound vulgar, then understand that I am pissed, and when I am pissed, I sound vulgar as a sailor who has just shit himself in the gutter because he is drunk on cheap booze. To true, many newbies do use numerals to tell and not show, but they eventually learn, or they go and fade away. The first thing to learn about writing properly is to read good books. See how your favorite authors do things, then you do it. It's that simple. Writing erotica/porn isn't really any different, it's just a different genre. If numbers are your thing go into mathmatics. If writing fiction is your passion, then write your passion, and edit, edit, edit.

DS

I've known several women in my time who purchase their bras at the Wooly Mammoth store. And a few who even bought panties at Buffalo Butts Are Us. I should say here that DS is one of the former by the looks of her AV. In any event, I'll use whatever it takes to get my audiance into the story as fast as I can when writing erotica/porn. If numbers do it, then I use numbers, if imagery is the ticket, then I use imagery. I never allow my hands to be tied to any one way of thinking, I just let the story write itself for the most part. I once met this angelic mark 14 torpedo bosomed lass whose S curves shimered as she strutted, giving her heart shaped, dimpled derrier a metronome dance that hypnotized even the most dedicated celibate.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Qualitative not Quantitative

IMO, it's better to say "she stayed still for about a minute" rather than "she stayed still for a relatively long period of time".

"She stayed still until she felt the full effect of his high-quality penis.

YOWSA! I LOVE WAKING UP TO LIT.

 

[damppanties]

Re: Re: Re: Qualitative not Quantitative

"She stayed still until she felt the full effect of his high-quality penis.

YOWSA! I LOVE WAKING UP TO LIT.

she, I'd love to be enlightened about the other types of peniss... penes... penises, well, the plural of penis.

 

[whispering_surrender]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualitative not Quantitative

she, I'd love to be enlightened about the other types of peniss... penes... penises, well, the plural of penis.

A plethora of penis, perhaps?

Whisper

Ps. (Actually, according to m-w.com, either penes or penises is correct......)

 

[oggbashan]

Size is relative

One thing to be wary of when using measurements is the difference in sizes between countries.

A size 12 is one thing in the UK, another in the US.

100; 80; 110 is a shapely lady if slightly heavy (in centimetres); 75; 55; 85 is small and slim. The first is a UK size 18; the second UK size 8.

If a lady is described as size 8 the impression I get is slightly underdeveloped. If size 18, a Rubenesque handful. Anything over size 20 seems to be in the BBW category. In real life, I can't tell a woman's dress size at a glance and whether she is slim or well covered depends on her build as well as her dress size. A six foot size 18 would look slim compared with a five foot size 14 if they were wearing similar clothes. But they don't. They dress to suit their figure so who am I to tell which is slim?

Og

My feet are UK size 13; continental size 49. In any language that is big.

 

[Hooper_X]

I don't mind physical descriptions that include specific measurements. They paint a picture. Admittedly, they must be worked into the story. But, vague descriptions are just that, vague.

...6'2" and 180 lbs (the classic for Literotica, it seems) when what we really mean to say was that the guy was big and imposing, lean and muscular.

This is a prime example. 6'2" and 180lb. is neither big nor imposing to me, and I fail to see how such a slightly built man could be described as muscular. So, I'd have a completely inaccurate idea of the relative height and weight of that character. If the story in question hinged these facts, the reader would be at a loss.

 

[Hooper_X]

Re: Size is relative

One thing to be wary of when using measurements is the difference in sizes between countries.

A size 12 is one thing in the UK, another in the US.

100; 80; 110 is a shapely lady if slightly heavy (in centimetres); 75; 55; 85 is small and slim. The first is a UK size 18; the second UK size 8.

If a lady is described as size 8 the impression I get is slightly underdeveloped. If size 18, a Rubenesque handful. Anything over size 20 seems to be in the BBW category. In real life, I can't tell a woman's dress size at a glance and whether she is slim or well covered depends on her build as well as her dress size. A six foot size 18 would look slim compared with a five foot size 14 if they were wearing similar clothes. But they don't. They dress to suit their figure so who am I to tell which is slim?

Og

My feet are UK size 13; continental size 49. In any language that is big.

I agree, all the more reason to be specific if such matters are of importance to the story.

Apropos of nothing, I'm guessing that I wear a 14 or 14½ in UK shoe sizes. I've never bought a pair of shoes from the UK, but I do have a few pairs of (clipless pedal) bike-shoes that are european size 50. In US sizes, I wear a 16. However, having been to a few Nike outlet stores in search of shoes in my size, I can tell you that there are much much larger sizes out there. I was shocked to see US sizes 18 - 21 in stock in a store. I'd never imagined that such shoes could be bought off the shelf. I'm sure that the guys who wear those shoes have a completely different idea of what does and doesn't constitute big feet than either you or I.

 

[Guest]

And you know what they say about guys who've got big feet, don't you? Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Lou

 

[LorriLove]

giggle

And you know what they say about guys who've got big feet, don't you? Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Lou

it's not true every time love, believe me on that

 

[Hooper_X]

And you know what they say about guys who've got big feet, don't you? Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Lou

Unfortunately, despite or inspite of my height and sizable feet, I don't have a king-sized package.

 

[Dirty Slut]

Men can be so silly...

Originally posted by Hooper_X
Unfortunately, despite or inspite of my height and sizable feet, I don't have a king-sized package.

What is it with you guys, and size? For cripes sake! I'll take a man with a normal 10 inch prick over a size 13 any day. I mean there's only so much room in a pussy to go around, and then the rest sticks outside. I read in another thread where one guy wanted to have a dick 1/5 his body size for crying out loud. I mean was he into Mares, Cows, or elephant pussy? Cause he sure as shit wouldn't be able to get it into any real human woman. Oh, and I'm sure he'd just love to try anal intercourse with something like that? Give me a break guys. It isn't the size, or the angle of the dangle that counts when it comes to men. It's how willing you are to eat pussy, and how good you are at it that counts to us. Dicks get soft, but a good tongue lasts a lifetime.

DS

 

[Hooper_X]

I'll take a man with a normal 10 inch prick over a size 13 any day.

A ten inch dick is quite a large one! I've oftened heard the adage that size doesn't matter. The thing is, I've mostly heard that in clinical or impersonal circumstances. I'm inclined to believe this is largely so much polite bullshit that women are taught to parrot on command. That is to say, I've often heard women say this publicly. The women whom I've been personally involved with have, over the years, overwhelmingly admitted a preference, ceteris paribus, for larger than average penises.

Thirteen inches may be prohibitively large for most women. But, most women known to me would prefer a fat nine-incher to a mediocre six.

Just yesterday I was reading the blog of a young female lawywer who admitted that she probably couldn't respect whomever she marries if he had a small penis. She went on to say that guys with small penises who try to go down on her for 8 hours to make up for it annoy her. Serveral other women concurred that it was a classic "little man" move. So, while there are surely women who don't like guys with big cocks, there are many who do.

 

[Dirty Slut]

Originally posted by Hooper_X
A ten inch dick is quite a large one! I've oftened heard the adage that size doesn't matter. The thing is, I've mostly heard that in clinical or impersonal circumstances. I'm inclined to believe this is largely so much polite bullshit that women are taught to parrot on command. That is to say, I've often heard women say this publicly. The women whom I've been personally involved with have, over the years, overwhelmingly admitted a preference, ceteris paribus, for larger than average penises.

Thirteen inches may be prohibitively large for most women. But, most women known to me would prefer a fat nine-incher to a mediocre six.

Just yesterday I was reading the blog of a young female lawywer who admitted that she probably couldn't respect whomever she marries if he had a small penis. She went on to say that guys with small penises who try to go down on her for 8 hours to make up for it annoy her. Serveral other women concurred that it was a classic "little man" move. So, while there are surely women who don't like guys with big cocks, there are many who do.

So what you're saying is that woman vary individually according to preference in cock size? Hmmmm, maybe men aren't so stupid after all. LOLOLOLOL PIMP as I ROFLMAO

DS